You are here

Walsingham Support - Pound Farm Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 20 July 2019

About the service

Pound Farm is a residential care home providing personal care to 15 people with learning disabilities up to aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 15 people. The service also has a supported living service St Marys Court. It provides care to four people with learning disabilities, living in their shared home.

Pound Farm was a large site, bigger than most domestic style properties, 15 people were living there in five flats. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the local area. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

People enjoyed living at the home and were complimentary about staff and the way the home was managed.

People, relatives and staff told us they liked the registered manager regularly and found them approachable and supportive.

Staff understood risks to people’s safety and supported them to stay as safe as possible.

There were enough staff to care for people at times people wanted assistance.

People were supported to have their medicines safely and checks were undertaken to ensure these were administered as prescribed.

The risk of infections and accidental harm was reduced, as staff used the knowledge and equipment provided to do this.

Staff spoke very affectionately about the people they cared for. People were confident to request support and reassurance from staff when they wanted this, and staff took time to provide this in the ways people preferred.

Staff respected people’s rights to make their own decisions about their lives and care. Where people needed support to make some decisions staff assisted them, using people’s preferred ways of communicating.

Staff had received training and developed the skills they needed to care for people, through induction and on-going training. People told us staff knew how to help them and knew what to do if they suspected anyone was at risk of harm.

People had access to other health and social care professionals and staff followed any advice given.

Staff ensured people had opportunities to do things which they enjoyed, and people were supported to keep in touch with others and religious practices that were important to them.

The views of people, relatives and other health and social care professionals were considered when people’s care was assessed, planned and reviewed, so people’s needs continued to be met, and based on people’s preferences.

Procedures were in place to take any learning from complaints and to further improve people’s care.

People’s wishes for their care at the end of their lives had been planned and the views of their relatives considered.

The registered manager and provider checked the quality of the care provided and encouraged suggestions from people and staff to improve people’s care further.

Rating at last inspection (and update).

The last rating for this service was Good in May 2016. Since this rating was awarded the registered provider of the service has change

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 20 July 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 20 July 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 20 July 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 20 July 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 20 July 2019

The service was well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.